Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35912164›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental social psychology2022

Untested assumptions perpetuate stereotyping: Learning in the absence of evidence.

William T L Cox, Xizhou Xie, Patricia G Devine

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental social psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

William T L CoxDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin - Madison, United States of America.
Xizhou XieDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin - Madison, United States of America.
Patricia G DevineDepartment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin - Madison, United States of America.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Basic and Translational Research to Combat Stereotypes and Unintentional BiasesR35GM128888 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI COX, WILLIAM TAYLOR LAIMAKA · 2018 to 2022
$1.9M
Breaking the Prejudice Habit: An Evidence-Based Campus-Wide Intervention EffortR35GM127043 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DEVINE, PATRICIA G · 2018 to 2022
$1.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM127043NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM128888
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the present work, we set out to assess whether and how much people learn in response to their stereotypic assumptions being confirmed, being disconfirmed, or remaining untested. In Study 1, participants made a series of judgments that could be influenced by stereotypes and received feedback that confirmed stereotypes the majority of the time, feedback that disconfirmed stereotypes the majority of the time, or no feedback on their judgments. Replicating past work on confirmation bias, patterns in the conditions with feedback indicated that pieces of stereotype-confirming evidence exerted more influence than stereotype-disconfirming evidence. Participants in the Stereotype-Confirming condition stereotyped more over time, but rates of stereotyping for participants in the Stereotype-Disconfirming condition remained unchanged. Participants who received no feedback, and thus no evidence, stereotyped more over time, indicating that, matching our core hypothesis, they learned from their own untested assumptions. Study 2 provided a direct replication of Study 1. In Study 3, we extended our assessment to memory. Participants made judgments and received a mix of confirmatory, disconfirmatory, and no feedback and were subsequently asked to remember the feedback they received on each trial, if any. Memory tests for the no feedback trials revealed that participants often misremembered that their untested assumptions were confirmed. Supplementing null hypothesis significance testing, Bayes Factor analyses indicated the data in Studies 1, 2, and 3 provided moderate-to-extreme evidence in favor of our hypotheses. Discussion focuses on the challenges these learning patterns create for efforts to reduce stereotyping.

Indexed as

BiasHebbian learningLearningStereotypesStereotyping

Identifiers

PMID35912164
PMCPMC9337700
OpenAlexW4283461363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.